Conclusion

Intel’s decision to arm its Core i7 line-up with eight cores makes sense, given a new eight-core, 16-thread Core i9-9900K flagship. But of course, the company had to pare its Core i7-9700K back to keep it from nipping at the i9-9900K's heels. Gone is Hyper-Threading, along with a bit of L3 cache. Nevertheless, two extra cores, higher Turbo Boost frequencies, and solder-based thermal interface material all combine to facilitate better performance in lightly- and heavily-threaded workloads compared to Core i7-8700K.

In the chart below, we plot gaming performance using average frame rates and a geometric mean of the 99th percentile frame times (a good indicator of smoothness), which we then convert into a frame-per-second measurement. Bear in mind that we tested with a Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 at 1920x1080 to alleviate graphics-imposed bottlenecks. Differences between our test subjects would shrink at higher resolutions.

Image2

Image1

Image4

Image5

Image6

Image7

Image3

Image10

Image9

Image8

Image2

Image1

Image4

Image5

Image6

Image7

Image3

Image10

Image9

Image8

As you can see, Core i7-9700K and Core i9-9900K are very similar when it comes to gaming. You certainly wouldn’t notice a difference between them in the real world at 2560x1440 or 3840x2160. Intel's Core i7-9700K certainly has enough horsepower to push the fastest graphics cards available. Saving a bit of money by skipping the -9900K, the expensive motherboard you need to drop it on, and super high-end cooling should help fund a better graphics card.

Intel’s Kaby Lake and first-gen Coffee Lake processors excelled in gaming benchmarks and lightly-threaded application workloads due to compelling per-core performance. But the arrival of AMD's Ryzen forced Intel to reconsider its strategy. Ryzen’s big core counts and inclusion of simultaneous multi-threading translated into substantial advantages in parallelized tasks. Today, Core i7-9700K's eight cores and aggressive Turbo Boost frequencies narrow the gap. Ryzen 7 2700X is still a great CPU for heavily-threaded applications, but its lead isn't as large. Moreover, the -9700K maintains a commanding lead in single-threaded apps, making it a well-rounded performer.

The Core i7-9700K’s extra on-die resources and higher multi-core Turbo Boost frequencies are enabled by Intel's solder-based thermal interface material. This STIM also helps relax the chip's cooling requirements, making it possible for a heat sink and fan to handle stock operation. High-end closed-loop liquid coolers should provide enough headroom for most overclocking efforts. And unlike Core i9-9900K, you don't need to sink big bucks into a premium power supply.

AMD's Ryzen 7 2700X remains competitive, particularly in measures of performance per dollar (value). Core i7-9700K is faster in games, but again, the 2700X should provide a similar experience if you match it up to a mid-range graphics card or run at the high resolutions that bottleneck even top-end GPUs. Ryzen 7 2700X is also attractive for builders with limited budgets, who want to spend the money they save on a gaming card on the higher-end of the GPU hierarchy.

Core i7-9700K doesn’t warrant an upgrade if you already own an -8700K or even -7700K. But if you're building a new PC, there's no reason to compromise by seeking out the older Core i7-8700K. To be sure, Intel's Core i7-9700K is the new mainstream performance leader for enthusiasts with money to spare. If heavily-threaded productivity applications are commonplace on your desktop, there might be reason to invest in Core i9-9900K. Otherwise, avid gamers and overclockers will find Core i7-9700K to be a well-balanced chip that doesn’t disappoint.

For the enthusiasts among us who have some breathing room in their budgets, Core i7-9700K is a much smarter choice for gaming than the pricey Core i9-9900K. It serves up similar performance at a significantly lower price. It's no slouch in heavier applications either, thanks to eight physical cores.